Video of the Pentagon Attack:
What is the Government Hiding?
Version 1.0, May 18, 2006;
Originally published, May 16, 2006
Today [May 16, 2006], the DOD released two videos from
Pentagon security cameras,
One of the videos includes the
leaked in 2002.
The new frames, including several from a different camera,
add almost nothing to the
body of public evidence
about the Pentagon attack on 9/11/01.
Since the new videos don't show an airplane,
they promise to fuel debates about what hit the Pentagon,
rather than put them to rest.
The US government has for years refused to release video evidence
that might undermine the popularity of the "no-Boeing" theories.
Today's release did not include video recordings from
seized by the FBI within minutes of the attack.
Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act Request,
filed on December 14, 2004, is similar to another request,
filed on October 14, 2004.
Both sought to obtain all of the camera recordings of the attack,
including those from other Pentagon security cameras,
ones seized from the Sheraton National Hotel and Nexcomm/Citgo gas station,
and those managed by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
The Pentagon had refused to release its recordings before today,
claiming they were
"part of an ongoing investigation involving Zacarias Moussaoui."
Most people who have heard of challenges to the official account
(that cells of al Qaeda operatives
were solely responsible for the attack)
have heard of the theory that the Pentagon was not hit by a jetliner.
The theory has been in circulation since early 2002,
Hunt the Boeing website
and Thierry Meyssan's
Big Lie and Le Pentagate.
The no-Boeing theories, which come in
small-plane, missile, and truck bomb, variants,
have flourished in the vacuum of video evidence, and
served as a straw man
with which to smear all
to the official account of the attack.
The refusal of authorities to release video evidence has
been cited by supporters of
Pentagon no-jetliner theories
as evidence that
If the government has proof that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon,
why doesn't it make it public?
Perhaps because it serves the cover-up to keep the
sideshow debate about what hit the Pentagon going.
In 2004, I suggested that the question of what hit the Pentagon was
a huge distraction.
physical evidence of the attack
shows that what's known of the damage and debris
fits the crash of Flight 77.
Today Mike Berger was interviewed by ABCNews.com
for the story
New Tape Stirs Up 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.
If Berger had used the interview to point out that the no-Boeing theory
is a distraction, you wouldn't know that from the story.
Instead, ABCNews.com quoted Berger as stating:
Four-and-a-half years later,
we still don't have definitive proof that a plane hit that building.
In selecting this quotation,
ABCNews.com may have misrepresented Berger's intention.
the statement necessarily implies that the following is possible:
scores of eyewitness reports of a jetliner
were faked, coerced, or coincidentally mistaken.
That the damage to the Pentagon, including an approximately 100-foot-wide
expanse of punctured facade walls on the first floor,
were somehow produced by a means other than a plane.
That fires that smelled like burning jet fuel,
running about 200 feet across the facade of the Pentagon,
were produced by some other means, or the photographs were faked.
That the aircraft debris, some of it clearly identifiable
as from an American Airliners 757, was planted.
That the swath of downed lamp-poles the width of a 757's wing span
were sliced and knocked over by some other means,
and that smashed objects lying in the paths of the engines
were damaged by some other means.
That the identification of human remains of Flight77's crew and passengers
That Flight 77 was destroyed and all on board were disposed of
at some unknown location.
To believe that the Pentagon was not hit by Flight 77
requires one to accept points 6 and 7.
To believe that no plane hit the Pentagon,
one has to accept all seven points.
Experience has shown
that the goal of virtually all mainstream media
news articles is to smear the entire
9/11 Truth Movement with the idea that no plane hit the Pentagon.
The ABCNews article is a good example
of cherry-picking a key sentence out of a long interview
to define the Movement in a way that serves an agenda.
The no-jetliner theories may be the primary manifestation of
a psychological operation designed to prevent rational examination
of the attack
by polarizing people around the issue of what hit the Pentagon.
The many (easily explained)
that flourish in the evidence vacuum give the issue
an X-Files-type intrigue.
The implication of such theories that
Flight 77 and its passengers disappeared
is reflexively offensive to people who identify with the victims,
and feeds stereotypes that all questioning of the official story
is the product of irrational "conspiratorial thinking."